4 ms·

It's amazing what great lengths some people will go to to stop others who might feel good from using a substance or performing an activity they are completely u

by joesmo 12y ago

It's amazing what great lengths some people will go to to stop others who might feel good from using a substance or performing an activity they are completely unfamiliar with. In America, at least, this seems to be much more ingrained in the culture than just about anything else. The really sad part is that even if this is in pursuit of saving lives, like the therapy mentioned in the article and many others, most people have absolutely no qualms about speaking out against it or trying to stop it. It seems, if it were up to the prevailing mindset in this country, everyone should live in absolute misery and pain. Drug companies wanting to develop non-generic drugs for profit reasons is one thing that's at least understandable, but the people who support such hate of others' potential at an enjoyable (or at least not horrific in the case of depression) life is just disgusting.

onion2k 12y ago
In the case of drugs, it's because most chemical compounds have more than one effect on the body. While something might alleviate one problem it can create an entirely different problem. Without a thorough understanding of what it's going to do to someone it would be deeply unethical for a chemist or a doctor to give someone a drug. This is not limited to illegal or untested drugs - it's unethical for a doctor to prescribe entirely legal drugs without knowing what they're giving.
- psychometry 12y ago
  Absolutely true, but the phama industry and plenty of politicians across the spectrum go to great lengths to even prevent research into these substances.
- joesmo 12y ago
  So this justifies hating others' pleasurable activities enough to send them to jail? I'm not seeing the connection.
jerf 12y ago
I don't think that's it. It doesn't match what I see or what I hear. What I see & hear are that "Drugs are bad, mm'kay?" And while, yes, I'm referencing a comedy show, I'm referencing the whole idea from the show, including the idea that people have been just so hammered by the propaganda that what they know is "Drugs are bad, mm'kay?" and can't even make a half-logical anymore after decades of thoughtless propaganda on the topic. And, even more importantly, the second-order effects that people know they are socially expected to posture the belief that drugs are bad means that people say it all the harder so they look even holier than the person next to them, by being seen to condemn it even harder. But I never hear anybody say "Omigosh, those guys might have a good time on a therapy drug, that can't be stood for!" That is, frankly, giving them too much credit, much as I hate to say it. Long before they're thinking that deeply about it, they've already hit the "Drugs are BAD!" button and stopped thinking about it. Behold the perils of demanding that nobody be allowed to think about certain things. How fortunate that this is the only case of that pattern in American culture.
- joesmo 12y ago
  I think this is a big part of it as well, though it's hardly unique. I don't think it's the whole story as what I'm describing does not only apply to drugs. In various times and places it has applied to music (jazz, rock, electronic at different times), dancing, sex, food, playing sports, and really just about any pleasurable activity. I think perhaps some of the Puritan roots are just all too alive and well. Also, it's not so much about thought but about feelings. That's why no one usually says it out loud. Also, I think the people that think in this way are aware of what they're thinking to some extent and in many cases, even realize the negative intent they're wishing upon others.
nhstanley 12y ago
While it's certainly very true that there are people who just want to ruin everyone else's fun out of spite, this situation is more complicated because there really are problems with uncontrolled administration of drugs, even ones we have studied for other purposes. There a many reasons why people in the article are stressing the need for trials. Even if we just stick to ketamine, there are many questions. First, is this better than the current standard of care? Is it better in the short term, long term, or both? How much better? Should we discontinue drugs like SSRIs altogether? Are people dying (committing suicide, in this case) because this is a fringe treatment and not the standard of care? Second, while we clearly already use it as an anesthetic, we don't know what the effects or dangers might be for this kind of use. Is repeated administration (as seems necessary) a health problem? Are side effects like hallucinations just temporary, or is the brain altered in some way permanently? There are drugs that, the longer and more frequently you take them, the more likely you are to have actual permanent problems (some antipsychotics, for example). Doing any kind of controlled study with humans is inherently difficult, and in some cases impossible (this is why we know so little about nutrition). But not doing controlled studies and carefully assessing the value of a treatment can be just as catastrophic as ignoring something that seems to work. And you can't go with your gut on these things, or we end up with antivaxers and dead people when we should have just done the study(s) the right way from the start.
- murbard2 12y ago
  Your argument is basically that it's generally a good idea to make sure a medical treatment is safe and effective before undertaking it. That's hardly controversial. What does not follow at all is that Ketamine should be banned, or that medical researchers should have to jump through D.E.A hoops to do research.
  - refurb 12y ago
    What does not follow at all is that Ketamine should be banned, or that medical researchers should have to jump through D.E.A hoops to do research. Ketamine isn't banned. And it's not all that controlled compared to other drugs (Schedule III). You'd have a harder time running a trial for morphine than you would for ketamine.
rmendelson 12y ago
I think the reason you see people criticizing psychotropic drugs is that they don't work. Ok, you'll probably say the drugs are saving lives, and how can you criticize that? But if you look at any of the studies, you'll see that the drugs are not any better than placebo, plus the drugs have terrible side effects. And nobody understands why the drugs work, or don't work, about as well as placebo. And if the drugs are only as good as placebo, or worse, and are addictive and in some cases even CAUSE depression, why are the drug companies selling them? Because money. That's why people criticize the drugs, with good reason.
- api 12y ago
  It's weirder than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_effect
- joesmo 12y ago
  This doesn't explain the exact same behavior related to other pleasurable activities that people engage in like music, dancing, sex, food, etc. I don't think it has anything to do with drugs and everything to do with people's hate of others' pleasure. Not to mention that that your claim that they don't work is unsubstantiated.

by joesmo 12y ago

onion2k 12y ago

In the case of drugs, it's because most chemical compounds have more than one effect on the body. While something might alleviate one problem it can create an entirely different problem. Without a thorough understanding of what it's going to do to someone it would be deeply unethical for a chemist or a doctor to give someone a drug. This is not limited to illegal or untested drugs - it's unethical for a doctor to prescribe entirely legal drugs without knowing what they're giving.

psychometry 12y ago
Absolutely true, but the phama industry and plenty of politicians across the spectrum go to great lengths to even prevent research into these substances.
joesmo 12y ago
So this justifies hating others' pleasurable activities enough to send them to jail? I'm not seeing the connection.

jerf 12y ago

I don't think that's it. It doesn't match what I see or what I hear. What I see & hear are that "Drugs are bad, mm'kay?" And while, yes, I'm referencing a comedy show, I'm referencing the whole idea from the show, including the idea that people have been just so hammered by the propaganda that what they know is "Drugs are bad, mm'kay?" and can't even make a half-logical anymore after decades of thoughtless propaganda on the topic. And, even more importantly, the second-order effects that people know they are socially expected to posture the belief that drugs are bad means that people say it all the harder so they look even holier than the person next to them, by being seen to condemn it even harder. But I never hear anybody say "Omigosh, those guys might have a good time on a therapy drug, that can't be stood for!" That is, frankly, giving them too much credit, much as I hate to say it. Long before they're thinking that deeply about it, they've already hit the "Drugs are BAD!" button and stopped thinking about it. Behold the perils of demanding that nobody be allowed to think about certain things. How fortunate that this is the only case of that pattern in American culture.

joesmo 12y ago
I think this is a big part of it as well, though it's hardly unique. I don't think it's the whole story as what I'm describing does not only apply to drugs. In various times and places it has applied to music (jazz, rock, electronic at different times), dancing, sex, food, playing sports, and really just about any pleasurable activity. I think perhaps some of the Puritan roots are just all too alive and well. Also, it's not so much about thought but about feelings. That's why no one usually says it out loud. Also, I think the people that think in this way are aware of what they're thinking to some extent and in many cases, even realize the negative intent they're wishing upon others.

nhstanley 12y ago

While it's certainly very true that there are people who just want to ruin everyone else's fun out of spite, this situation is more complicated because there really are problems with uncontrolled administration of drugs, even ones we have studied for other purposes. There a many reasons why people in the article are stressing the need for trials. Even if we just stick to ketamine, there are many questions. First, is this better than the current standard of care? Is it better in the short term, long term, or both? How much better? Should we discontinue drugs like SSRIs altogether? Are people dying (committing suicide, in this case) because this is a fringe treatment and not the standard of care? Second, while we clearly already use it as an anesthetic, we don't know what the effects or dangers might be for this kind of use. Is repeated administration (as seems necessary) a health problem? Are side effects like hallucinations just temporary, or is the brain altered in some way permanently? There are drugs that, the longer and more frequently you take them, the more likely you are to have actual permanent problems (some antipsychotics, for example). Doing any kind of controlled study with humans is inherently difficult, and in some cases impossible (this is why we know so little about nutrition). But not doing controlled studies and carefully assessing the value of a treatment can be just as catastrophic as ignoring something that seems to work. And you can't go with your gut on these things, or we end up with antivaxers and dead people when we should have just done the study(s) the right way from the start.

murbard2 12y ago
Your argument is basically that it's generally a good idea to make sure a medical treatment is safe and effective before undertaking it. That's hardly controversial. What does not follow at all is that Ketamine should be banned, or that medical researchers should have to jump through D.E.A hoops to do research.
- refurb 12y ago
  What does not follow at all is that Ketamine should be banned, or that medical researchers should have to jump through D.E.A hoops to do research. Ketamine isn't banned. And it's not all that controlled compared to other drugs (Schedule III). You'd have a harder time running a trial for morphine than you would for ketamine.

rmendelson 12y ago

I think the reason you see people criticizing psychotropic drugs is that they don't work. Ok, you'll probably say the drugs are saving lives, and how can you criticize that? But if you look at any of the studies, you'll see that the drugs are not any better than placebo, plus the drugs have terrible side effects. And nobody understands why the drugs work, or don't work, about as well as placebo. And if the drugs are only as good as placebo, or worse, and are addictive and in some cases even CAUSE depression, why are the drug companies selling them? Because money. That's why people criticize the drugs, with good reason.

api 12y ago
It's weirder than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_effect
joesmo 12y ago
This doesn't explain the exact same behavior related to other pleasurable activities that people engage in like music, dancing, sex, food, etc. I don't think it has anything to do with drugs and everything to do with people's hate of others' pleasure. Not to mention that that your claim that they don't work is unsubstantiated.